The MOST dangerous profession....

Amen to that!

 

Ironically, that is exactly what Erasmus did in this verse -- removing the Greek word for "tree." Boy, hate to be him.


Andy

 

I would agree with Erasmus over W/H anyday.

 

Instead of Erasmus, your confidence should be in the preserved Word of God -- all preserved Greek manuscripts say "tree of life" rather than "book of life." Perhaps it's not a big deal to you if someone modifies God's Word?

Andy

 

Trust me, it is a big deal, that's way I'm still here. BTW, "book of life" is what I have in my Bible, I guess your book is wrong. BTW again, what book do you use?

 

I just don't get it. Bro Tim, you mentioned excising even one word , so I am wondering about the differences in the editions of the KJV.Maybe you've addressed this already in another thread, but as you are aware, the 1769, has actual word changes...(proof upon request)from the 1611. IF even one word is changed, whether added or subtracted from the 1611 to the 1769, isn't that a violation of Rev 22:19? That's why I don't believe this verse is speaking of an English standard translation centuries after the originals.And if the 1611 is inspired, how about it's "jots and tittles"? Where did those "jots and tittles" disappear in 1769?

 

Most of the time either a KJV or an ESV. When studying, I check both for accuracy against the Greek/Hebrew/Aramaic as best I can. In the case of this verse, my ESV gets it right and my KJV gets it wrong.

I know it's a big deal to you. It is to me, too. That's why when I look and see that every ancient Greek Bible has "tree of life" I have to conclude that that is what God breathed out to John.

Andy

 

If you want to get dogmatic about it, you might as well burn each and every copy of the Bible. Any translation adds words and takes away words. And since we do not have the original autographs, how can we be sure which manuscripts are purely the original words without adulteration? Burn 'em!

Yes, the above was very tongue-in-cheek, but it is also the extreme position if you follow the line of thought.

In Christ,
Trotter

 

I'm sure God meant what He said, too, but He didn't say "book of life" in this verse. I'm not adding or deleting anything, just noticing what God preserved.

Timothy, have you noticed the wide range of ideas, positions, and interpretations on this BB (not even considering the version issue)? Just think of all the debates going on. Now, how many of these issues rise or fall on a textual variant? Zero. The differences that exist between Bible believing members of the BB have nothing to do with the text that they use; rather, it has everything to do with their hermeneutic and their illumination from the Holy Spirit. I think the Lord is much more concerned with our rightly dividing the Word of Truth than He is with our attempts at textual criticism.

Andy

 

Bro Tim, thank you for your honesty and sincerity, it is refreshing ! As my College professor said (TTU), it's okay to disagree agreeably!

 

I agree, we must remember that the KJB is a translation and its impossible to go from the Greek/Hebrew on a one-to-one word basis or else the KJB translators (actually all Bible translators on earth) are in BIG trouble.

IMO only an unsaved person would treat the Word of God as if it was something to modify on a personal whim. Everyone here is interested in restoring the Word of God to it's original form not adding or taking away from it.

Don't forget it is as easy for the (W&H)ers to say "it was added to your text" as the KJVO to say "it was deleted from your text" (of which the KJB translators did themselves). God forbid, and no one can prove who is correct without the original.

The KJVO think that they have the "perfect" Word but herein is the problem : which edition? each edition is different. Poor KJB Translators, they should have left well enough alone.

Yes, the "tree/book of life" passage is an irony.

Deuteronomy 4
2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.

 

Note that it says "take away from the words of the book of this prophecy" and NOT "take away words from the book of this prophecy" - these mean different things. The first, which the scripture has, deals with the meaning, while the second deals with the actual words themselves. What can you "take away from the words"? Meaning. It is possible to preserve the meaning with different words, thus a different translation that carries the same meaning is not taking away anything.

 

BrianT, that's an excellent point about the meaning of the words! I'd never heard it put that way, and I thought I heard alot! Yikes!!!

 

Note that it says "take away from the words of the book of this prophecy" and NOT "take away words from the book of this prophecy" - these mean different things. The first, which the scripture has, deals with the meaning, while the second deals with the actual words themselves. What can you "take away from the words"? Meaning. It is possible to preserve the meaning with different words, thus a different translation that carries the same meaning is not taking away anything. </font>[/QUOTE]I've read it a thousand times and never noticed that. Thanks a lot. Isn't it great that God teaches us something everyday?

 

Brian T:
I was going to say the same thing you did! I always understood that verse to mean you cannot add to the meaning of God's word, such as adding to the purity of Salvation. BTW, hubby & I had a long conversation about the Bible issue today, KJV, and the Spanish. You know, to my shame I did not know or realize until recently that the KJV1611 was not the KJV we use! As a teen I just took whatever I was taught and was never told there were "editions"in between todays Bible and the actual 1611!?! How stupid did I feel! I even went to Bible College!?!So, what is the problem with the "Spanish edition"?
In Christ,
Peggy
Is.6:8